1. The judgment of the first instance court, including any claims extended or added by this court, shall be modified as follows:

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is a corporation with the purpose of wholesale and retailing used cars, and C is the plaintiff's employee, and the defendant is the owner of D-car (hereinafter "this case").

B. On April 17, 2019, E, using the mother-friendly F name, posted a notice to sell the instant vehicle to H “H” camera on the Internet G site (hereinafter “instant notice”), and entered “I” in contact address.

C. On April 18, 2019, C reported the instant sign language and contacted with the above contact point, and E, pretended to the Defendant, the owner of the instant vehicle, sold the instant vehicle in KRW 7,000,000, and notified C of the account number in the name of the Defendant.

C on April 18, 2019, transferred KRW 7,000,000 from the Plaintiff’s account to the account under the Defendant’s name known by E.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 6, purport of whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. On April 18, 2019, the Defendant received a remittance of KRW 7,000,000 from the Plaintiff and did not deliver the instant vehicle. Since the Defendant obtained unjust enrichment equivalent to the said amount without any legal cause, it is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the said KRW 7,00,000,000 and damages for delay on the ground of the return of unjust enrichment.

B. Although the conjunctive Claim E demanded the Defendant to return KRW 6,500,000 out of KRW 7,000,000 that was transferred to the Defendant’s account, the Defendant did not confirm it properly and made it easy for the Defendant to commit tort against the Plaintiff.

Since the defendant's above aiding and abetting act causes damage to the plaintiff by deceiving 7,00,000 won, the defendant is liable for damages arising from joint tort against the transferred amount, and even if considering the plaintiff's negligence, 50% of the defendant is liable to the defendant.